community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <>
Subject Re: Encouraging Diversity - Update 6
Date Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:03:36 GMT
That should be "example of undesirable behavior". One could obviously 
write a rule that prohibits using words with more than three syllables 
in e-mails.

On 11/15/2016 8:56 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote:
> What I am looking for is an example of behavior that is permitted by the
> current code of conduct but that could be prohibited by a practical,
> enforceable set of rules.
> On 11/15/2016 8:28 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>> What are you looking for, exactly? I'm not sure what a "use-case" is in
>> this context.
>> We have a concrete example of what not to do in this very thread
>> already. I
>> was contacted off-list by Niclas making it clear he expected me to
>> provide
>> proof that would "convince" him that I wasn't trying to "breed" a "a
>> cry-baby and victimhood culture".
>> Is this really the sort of thing we want to tolerate when a member of
>> community mentions that they've had bad experiences before. Is this
>> sort of
>> thing the "inclusivity" and "welcoming-ness" we aim for?
>> As it happens, I wasn't bringing up my bad experiences to make any
>> concrete
>> point about what we should or should not do re policy, only to refute
>> Niclas's nonsense idea that "safety" is not a word we should be using.
>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2016 at 16:58 Patricia Shanahan <> wrote:
>>> On 11/15/2016 6:48 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
>>> ...
>>>> You want some sort of "record" to consume. Is a person, on a mailing
>>> list,
>>>> saying "hey this place was so bad for me I had to take a break" not
>>>> evidence enough for you that something might be wrong?
>>>> As for the rest of it, this org keeps records of every email sent to
>>>> the
>>>> lists. It would not be hard for you to go looking for context if you
>>> wanted
>>>> it.
>>>> Asking me to go over all that stuff again (which I find upsetting to
>>>> even
>>>> think about) days after returning here hoping things would be nicer for
>>> me,
>>>> is, well, ... it's not particularly considerate.
>>> ...
>>> I don't think asking you to go over something you found upsetting is
>>> necessary. On the other hand, I have started looking at the mail
>>> archives for your 2015 participation, and I don't think I have found the
>>> right context, or if I have I am not recognizing it.
>>> Could you perhaps save some time by giving a pointer in terms of e.g. a
>>> mailing list and topic?
>>> Or, if you prefer we not discuss your particular situation, could you
>>> give a pointer to any use-case, in terms of mailing list and topic?
>>> This very discussion is an illustration of why "feeling" based standards
>>> are a problem. Some people are not comfortable setting policies without
>>> solid use-cases they can discuss and analyze. Others may not be
>>> comfortable with discussion and analysis of those use-cases. How does
>>> one accommodate both sets of feelings?
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message